ccmedoc

What about CHAMPS RN...thats MY favorite.... I would put insulin shock with metabolic. AEIOUTIPS is a good one, you should remember that one and when to use it. Soon it will become second nature.

Still unacceptable. If for nothing else, your truck is not built for that speed. Before all the equipment was put in and reinforcements taken out, it still would have a hard time sustaining that speed safely. #-o Freakin' cowboys :joker: (not texas individuals, per se..lol)

OOOOOOHHHH!! I can't wait to hear this one.... :rabbit:

Nor me..in the front or the back. I would not be in this ambulance........wait.......YOU would not be in this ambulance for very long. This is ridiculous and unwarranted in any situation. You hit the nail on the head with "wacker factor". Next........

I would still prefer not to have them in the way. The only exception would be if I new them personally. Not to start another b!%^H fest, but I have a number of nurse/paramedics, who got their medic license to be a nurse (transition program)..and they cannot function in the field. A handful work in the ICU or ED. Same goes for a similar group who have trouble inhospital, but are fantastic in the field..you just don't know until you get there. Paramedic, RN, doctor..best to 'dance with the girl that brung ya', and not introduce the added variables onscene..IMHO NOTE: Not much to do with the original post..but I had an opinion

I don't think it is necessarily the people using mnemonics that are the problem but how they are taught to use them. Most people use them for one thing or another..we just never used them much, nor were we taught that way (generic we) . It is harder for me to memorize a mnemonic for everything I do, rather than memorize the information proper. That is where I am coming from... It is much more important to realize that you should base your assessments on the patient and their condition. To use the same mnemonic for every call is asking to miss something..He (dustdevil) makes mention of the "cookbook paractitioners"..these people are generally less than adequate when the 'poop hits the fan' due to their lack of critical thinking. It is more important to fit your interview to your patient than the patient to your interview or mnemonic..For this you would need the strong base education in disease process for an adequate differential.. The OP was not being chastised, only the fact that it appeared to be a cookbook class designed around a protocol book, and not medicine..that was most of the points I gleaned from the "discussion", and I use that term loosely. It would be advisable to find an assessment tool that fits the OP's personality and knowledge base, and use this for a general interview and fit it to the patient condition, complaints, etc. Very few things happen in the order of the mnemonics, and most of the questions never get asked, the answers are in the presentation and complaints. If you get flustered when you miss a letter, or it happens out of order (I have seen this)..then you are in trouble..... One more point to take under advisement for the OP...thicken the skin.. If everything is taken to heart as this was..you will not be long for this area of medicine..especially as you get into the advanced levels and your every move is scrutinized..just a word, or two...more than I intended to write, anyway.. 8) Edited for content..

Yep...

I don't think anyone would question this..if they did I missed it. The fact that they had the intervention there while 911 was activated was the heart of the discussion as I understood it. To administer the med for a possible emergency and then go on with their day as if nothing happened..not a chance. This should be a legitimate scope for these uptrained teachers while 911 is activated, in lieu of having medical staff present..i.e. nurses.

What a complete load....You spend all your time learning mnemonics to learn which questions to ask...when do you learn what the answers to the questions mean? They should concentrate on useful, base education...then go with the frivolous crap...Darn!! there is that EDUCATION word again.. :oops: ...Just my opinion....

:shock: I'm having a hard time with this....am I the only one?? :-({|=

A little more information... http://web.kshb.com/kshb/pdf/ACurrentOpini...REwy06MCC58.pdf

I was under the impression that this is what is being taught now..What with minimal interruptions in compressions, two minutes of compressions before shocks, no stacked shocks, fewer pulse checks..if any (layperson), etc. But I could be wrong...Happens a LOT!!

No, I don't...quite the contrary. Your comments just make the case for what we have "discussed" in other threads...you know the indomitable, "BLS is..limited scope of practice...nothing to offer but oxygen and transport...compromising patient care...why do we still have this level of provider..." argument :shock: I just didn't want to make this a "..then why do we have BLS?" dragout...ya know. Oh well..there it is. :roll:

=D> =D> =D>

:-k :-k

Read this....'nuff said. Its not about BLS/ALS skills..the education needed to realize when to use them or not is. Just because the medic didn't want to bust backside to the hospital, doesn't mean he/she was lazy. It is most likely that it was not as serious as you anticipated. Why get the patient all jacked up for nothing? Reread Dustdevil's post please!!

Only for parking..has a star of life and a caduceus and says paramedic/RN..Not even that big..

Only that it is accepted..It is constantly evolving, much like everything in medicine. The more evidence presented on the subject, the more we see how fallible the practice may be. As it stands, it is the best thing we have going with any evidence behind it..good and bad. I find it interesting that some things termed "new" have such strong resemblance to "old" practices tried and thrown away some years ago. I have seen, in artificial cardiopulmonary resuscitation manuals from the early 70's, maneuvers suspiciously similar to this study. Without the necessary evidence based studies, they were deemed inefficient as they did not directly impact the heart's pumping action. Now the Zoll autopulse claims to move more blood than humanly possible, by compressing the entire chest.Take that for what it is worth. I am in the process of looking these (the old manuals) up and digitizing them..I hope to have them soon as time permits...just for arguments sake. I was just seeking opinions from the gallery, as I have done in my part of the world. Interesting that the periodical I gleaned this from was a respiratory journal....I don't know why that struck me as odd? :roll:

I believe that whether you are a basic, nurse, another medic, physician, or hold no medical license at all..you have the right to question decisions made in patient care. I also think there is a constructive to do so. I would suggest that if you critique someone else's decision, whatever it is, it is on the basis of strong evidence and not opinion or hearsay. I do not believe that EMTs need to babysit their medics, or the other way around...I do have to say though..the question asked was a bit offensive, and if this is the way you (generic you) ask questions about treatment rendered..the answers may be just as offensive or demeaning. Formulate educated, tactful, constructive questions or critique, and educated well thought answers may ensue.. I stand by my first post in that if it bothers you (specific you) so much to work with these medics, go to school, become a paramedic, and lead, by example, to the level of quality you believe the service needs to be held to. ...Another opinion

Any thoughts on this research?? Purdue did some research on abdominal thrust CPR in comparison to chest compression--- http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/...70905155141.htm

Maybe....Go to paramedic school...then you won't have to question anyone's patient care but your own...Just a suggestion. 8) :shock: Good luck with the thread, by the way... :shock:

If she was taking oral hypoglycemic meds...some antibiotics interfere with their action. You would need to know if she had a preexisting condition resulting in hypermetabolic state, such as recent injury, illness, surgery, etc. Any herbals she may have been taking? There are a few odd ball herbal "remedies" that produce a type of refractory hypoglycemia. I could drudge up a case study or two when I have more time.. I think I would have given some oral glucose (sucrose gel) instead of the common OJ, Peanut butter and jelly, and the such. If an individual drops their sugars to below 150 mg/dl after 25g of dextrose, I would give at least another 12g and transport to the hospital. I have seen individuals, both IDDM and NIDDM, take 125g of dextrose and burn it up in less than 20 min. A general rule we use is, if the patient does not have a blood glucose of over 225mg/dl after the first 25g, we will monitor for a few minutes and see if they drop. If a drop is seen, transport is advised and additional dextrose prepared for administration. edited for content and grammar..

This patient could be immobilized and c-collared with the cric. Any packing done with trauma dressings and the such would stay in place, and you would still be able to visualize the airway through the hole in the front of the collar..thats what it is for. Besides making it easier to keep the tube you placed where it belongs, it may make it more difficult for the patient to reach it if he becomes aware. I think the c-collar would be a benefit to the providers and the patient. Free up some space and hands for other things that, assuredly, would need to be done..

I use this too..quick, concise, and its all there. I never liked SOAP..don't know why. Thats what they push in the hospital, but....... :roll:

I think you guys should nix the 10 codes and stay as far away from EMD and the associated codes as possible. Plain English and priority status. Pagers could relay other pertinent information...